Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Division of Syrian Church?
#1
Quote:The question who it was that produced the Peshitta version of the New Testament will perhaps never be answered. That it was not Rubbula has been proved by Voobus's researches. . .In any case, however, in view of the adoption of the same version of the Scriptures by both the Eastern (Nestorian) and Western (Jacobite) branches of Syrian Christendom, we must conclude that it had attained a considerable degree of status before the division of the Syrian Church in AD 431. (Bruce M. Metzger, The Early Versions of the New Testament (New York: Claredon, 1977), p. 36)

Is it correct to say that a division occurred in the Syrian Church in 431 A.D. ?
Reply
#2
Hi Akhi Michael,

Not at all. "Syrian Church" implies, naturally enough, the Church in "Syria".

The Church of the East was, of course, NOT in Syria - but in Mesopotamia....in an altogether different empire.....under an altogether different leadership.....always independent and always different from any other group west of the great border between the two empires. (No, Rome did not "rule the world!") <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

If, by chance, he meant by "Syrian" the greater body of Aramaic-speaking Christians no matter what empire they found themselves in - then he is doing everyone a great disservice by implying that they were, prior to 431 AD, "united" in any sense of the term.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#3
I think there is a kind of a split. We've talked about this before, that the Syrian Orthodox, and COE were seperate jurisdictions etc. Before 431 etc. thus not split.


I would submit that a lot of confusion I think comes from the fact that all of Christianity in the persian empire has the same Apostolic starting point. Edessa Turkey. It doesn't matter if you here about the Armenian church, or the Church of the East or even the Syrian Orthodox church. They all claim the arrival of Addai (thadeus) and Bartholemew as a big milestone in their founding. (The SOC actually is more western than the COE, where they actually do claim Antioch, even though Edessa ends up becoming where there head quarters is).


Anyway while things politically or jurisdictionally may not have been broken down into an east and west Syriac jurisdictions, prior to 431. You have Edessa as the main focal point, of where many things originate. The later so called "nestorian" seminaries etc. that were at Nisbis, I thought came originally from Edessa etc.


And besides having some of the same origons. I wold suspect that prior to 431 that east and western churches were in communion and communication with each other, in the same way that the Latin, Greek, Egyptian etc. churches were having similar relations during pre and post nicene times.


So in the aspect "OF being One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church" (being in fellowship with one another), I would suspect that they would be "One Church". But not in the sense, of them being formally united politically and religiously into one body/denomination and that the Nestorian Controversy ends up being something that splits them into two distinct entities.
Reply
#4
oozeaddai Wrote:And besides having some of the same origons. I wold suspect that prior to 431 that east and western churches were in communion and communication with each other, in the same way that the Latin, Greek, Egyptian etc. churches were having similar relations during pre and post nicene times.


.

It is difficult to imagine them being too close if it took 75 or 80 years for the mesopotamisn church to even hear about the decsision of 431 (if this is the case)
Reply
#5
judge Wrote:
oozeaddai Wrote:And besides having some of the same origons. I wold suspect that prior to 431 that east and western churches were in communion and communication with each other, in the same way that the Latin, Greek, Egyptian etc. churches were having similar relations during pre and post nicene times.


.

It is difficult to imagine them being too close if it took 75 or 80 years for the mesopotamisn church to even hear about the decsision of 431 (if this is the case)


I've been taking taking a look at "East of the Euphrates", which i just started a new thread on.


<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=1553">http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=1553</a><!-- m -->


anyway it looks to me skimming through chapter 2) "Christianity in Edessa", and Chapter 3) "Christianity in Persia".


That the churches were seperated officially by the time of Constantine. And infact Constantine is the direct cause of it. (The Chrisitans persecuted for fear of being spies of 5th Columnists of Rome/ Byzantium).


Anyway if you look at the chapter 2, or other writings. It really looks like Syriac Chrisitanity as far as the first three hundred years were all more or less part of the same Church. Or at least closely affiliated with each other. But physical distance and the need to politically distance themselves, caused more of the formal jurisdcitional divisions.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)